[Ansteorra-archery] What are things that are keeping outCombatArchers of the field?

[Richard Threlkeld]

Very well said.

Caelin

> First, an answer to your question:
> It all depends on what the unit commander orders, according to
> the battle plan.  Some scenarios might have archers moving
> forward, some might have them stand fast, some might have them
> rove, etc.  A battle is fluid, and often changes with lightning
> rapidity, so even previously issued orders may be changed.
>
> Which brings me to my next point.
> I am also a stickler for the rules on the battlefield.  I would
> NEVER intentionally hit a non-contact participant; to do so would
> be intensely dishonorable for me, and those who know me know that
> I value my honor very highly.  I believe that the fighters that I
> call my brothers and sisters in arms would also never
> intentionally hit a non-contact participant.
>
> Is this a 100% guarantee that I will never hit a non-contact
> participant accidentally?  No, it does not.  Note the operative
> word here:  "accidentally".  You'll never get that 100%
> guarantee, and it's not realistic to expect it.  A battlefield is
> an extremely volatile situtation under barely controlled
> conditions, requiring split-second decisions to strike or not to
> strike.  While no fighter I know would intentionally hit a
> non-contact participant, sometimes it happens.  Marshals get hit,
> as they must be in the thick of things to ensure the maximum
> safety of all involved (and are sometimes more careless of their
> own safety than that of the fighters).  Non-contact archers
> sometimes get hit accidentally when they get caught in the thick
> of things, or when a fighter fails to notice the red pheon.  None
> of us wants these things to happen, but we must be realistic and
> realize that they do, and that there is no certain way to prevent
> it without making battles so stodgy and stylized that they become
> little more than choreographed dance routines.
>
> BATTLE IS DANGEROUS, even with the safety precautions and
> sensible rules that fight under.  If you eliminate ALL danger,
> however, you also eliminite one of the most exciting aspects of
> the game.  Most of us who participate in fighting have been hurt
> to a lesser or greater extent at one time or another -
> accidentally.  But I've been hurt worse playing football at a
> church picnic, and never mind the one time I tried playing rugby!
>  :)  Most human activities are dangerous to some degree - look at
> any sport, and consider jobs such as building skyscrapers, or
> being a fireman.  The world is not a safe place, and it never
> will be.  Can we minimize danger?  Certainly, but we will never
> completely eliminate it.
>
> I am fully in favor trying to ensure that everyone who wants to
> participate in SCA combat can do so, but it will never be a safe
> pasttime.  Walking onto a battlefield where hundreds of people
> are doing their level best to hit each other with sticks while
> trying to avoid being hit in return is an inherently dangerous
> thing to do.  This is why we must sign waivers before we are
> allowed to do it.  Boiled down to essentials, the waiver means "I
> know that I'm about to do something dangerous, I'm walking into
> it with my eyes open, and I take full responsibility for whatever
> happens."  If it wasn't dangerous, there would be no need for waivers.
>
> It was not my intent to offend or insult anyone with the above
> words.  These are merely my opinions, though I like to think that
> they are backed up by the facts and are the product of careful
> consideration on my part.
>
> I am very willing to listen to and discuss any ideas that make
> the game safer and allows more people to participate.  I do not
> believe that I know everything about SCA combat, or that my own
> beliefs on the subject are some kind of gospel.
>
> Hoping that we can all come to a meeting of minds,
>
> Padraig Ruad O'Maolagain
> Spearman for Fian Ruadh
>
> Maria wrote:
>
> >I think that she meant that your e-mail came across as a little
> on the gruff
> >side. It sounded to me the same way. I have been reminded many times that
> >e-mail does not convey tone of voice or facial expressions.
> >
> >I am not asking for special rules. But, if there is a rule
> that's in place
> >that says when I wear a special symbol on my helm that says I'm not a
> >contact participant, well I expect not to get hit. That would
> not be fair.
> >It's like when we were all children. When the child we played a prticular
> >game with (say CandyLand) cheated, you didn't want to play
> anymore with that
> >child because it was unfair. Well, I don't want to play with people that
> >break the rules.
> >
> >Well, right now there is a rule in place that fighters either just plain
> >ignore or they forget in the heat of battle. I don't think that
> it is a pipe
> >dream to get to a 100% gaurantee of not being hit. I think that
> it is just
> >going to take a while. We just need some really good ideas on
> how to prevent
> >this from hapening. The pheons might just not be working as well
> as we would
> >like them to work.
> >
> >So, my question that might lead to a suggestion....Do archers
> usually stand
> >in one place or do they move forward with the troops?
> >
> >Maria
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Sent via the WebMail system at irishbard.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra-archery mailing list
> Ansteorra-archery at ansteorra.org
> http://www.ansteorra.org/mailman/listinfo/ansteorra-archery
>
>